I don't know, I don't want to be an argumentative prick, but I'm not sure how much I'd agree that he embraced change. I know he has said stuff about the spread, but ultimately I still think he'd be running the ball until it didn't work and then I think he'd run it some more. His guiding principle would still be to bend other teams to our will physically, something that hasn't been true around here for a LONG time.
That's the beauty of football. A prolific passing game is fun, but if your passing sucks, you better have something to fall back on. TO trusted his ability to move the ball on the ground while minimizing mistakes and eating up clock. When he got a lead, he forced the other team to change what they wanted to do in order to catch up.
Conversely, in the times we ran up against a good opponent, we worried that we couldn't play catch up with a ground control game. There's simply wasn't enough time in the game.
Modern offenses that spread out the field and rely on great players making things happen in the open field with quick score ability is desirable.
The reason I would favor a run first mentality is because quarterback play is so spotty everywhere. In the NCAA or the NFL, it seems there are never more than 10 guys in either that can really sling it. We've never come close to having a really good passer short of Zac. Taylor.
But dynamic runners who are serviceable passers are more readily available. Same concept. Get them into space and chew up yards with their feet or the guy they are pitching it to. It's never bothered me that the pros turn up their nose at old Nebraska football. Just win